Cameroon and Nigeria deserve a world cup spot more than Norway and Ireland, frankly. Uruguay also warrant a spot, and Columbia aren't bad either.

Four more European spots would be pretty ridiculous, given the performance of the likes of Poland, Serbia & Montenegro, and even Ukraine, who despite making the quarters haven't exactly done anything of note so far, and got blessed with the easiest draw around by far. The performance of European nations has been pretty good at this world cup, but it is in Europe after all, and the lesser European teams haven't done any better than most of the teams from Africa.

If 36 places was the new mark, I'd add one to Africa, one to South America and two to Europe, at most, and let Asia/North America keep their shared spot that they have now. If they stay at 32, I'd either take that shared spot and give it to Africa, or take the third outright qualification position from North/Central America and give that to Africa.

There will always be teams that underperform like S&M. However, look at the breakdown of the 1/4 finalists. There are 6 European and 2 S.American Teams. Adding in another African country is a joke. Weakens the competition further. Look how poor Togo are and they qualified ahead of Nigeria, Senegal etc. Sad fact is that Africa has produced a number of very good player and their teams have advanced but European soccer has progressed faster.

As for the Europeans not getting enough places just look in recent times of good teams that were unable to qualify do to the strength of competition in Europe and a few other factors including luck.

1990 Italy World Cup 3rd place but could not qualify for Euro Championships in 1992 EDITED

1990 and 1994 Denmark did not qualify for the World Cup but won the Euro Championship in 1992

1990 England were Semi-Finalists but unable to qualify in 1994

1994 France were unable to qualify but won the tournament in 1998

2004 European Champions Greece were unable to qualify for the 2006 World Cup

European football is lightyears ahead of the rest of the World in terms of depth. As I said earlier, other regions have been improving but the Euros have been getter at a faster rate and they are increasing the gap.

Europe produces a massive number of quality teams. S. America should never get an extra place as their is so little competition for the final place as it is. Qualification in S. America is too easy. Who cares if Uruaguay or Peru did not make it. Looking at the football its easy to appreciate that they are not very good.

Actually I might also take a place away from N. America (CONCACAF). US, T&T and Costa Rica seems 1 place too many for the quality of football provided.

For those who think Im sqeezing out other regions, I do not care about where teams come from but I am interested getting the best soccer. I dont see how being the 3rd best team in a crappy football region allows qualification to the World Cup when you are never going to be anything but a passenger and countless teams from other regions (some capable of winning the thing) are denied the opportunuty.

AS A COMPRIMISE How about each region gets 1 place (Euro, Asia, Africa etc) and then global qualifying rather than regional. At least the best teams would make it.

Last edited by Goughy; 30-06-2006 at 03:05 AM.

If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

Geraint - I agree with you for the first time in a while mate. I am looking forward to the quarter finals but at the same time I am starting to realise that there are only 7 proper games left and then it will all be over for another four years...

Geraint - I agree with you for the first time in a while mate. I am looking forward to the quarter finals but at the same time I am starting to realise that there are only 7 proper games left and then it will all be over for another four years...

Sad innit. This is the point where it all gets exciting but it's very nearly over

When Denmark won Euro 92 they had not even qualified for it, but went because they had finished second behind Yugosslavia, who were in the midst of war

Holland failed to qualify for the 2002 World Cup after reaching the semis in 98, missing out at ireland's expense

France have just knocked out one of the favourites, Spain, yet they scraped through qualifying, finishing neck and neck with Switzerland, Israel and Ireland

I will put good money on Greece not even qualifying for Euro 2008 despite being the defending champions

With holders no longer qualifying by right, it is forseeable, with the strength of the European qualifying groups, that soon enough a European World Cup winner will not appear at the next tournament. As I have said previously, if places are going to be re-allocated, I would take away the Asia-Concacaf play-off and replace it with an automatic place for the holders. This would have meant Uruguay featuring in this tournament I think, and Australia would probably have had to beat Peru in the play-off game.

There will always be teams that underperform like S&M. However, look at the breakdown of the 1/4 finalists. There are 6 European and 2 S.American Teams. Adding in another African country is a joke. Weakens the competition further. Look how poor Togo are and they qualified ahead of Nigeria, Senegal etc. Sad fact is that Africa has produced a number of very good player and their teams have advanced but European soccer has progressed faster.

Yes, they did, and England missed the World Cup in 94, and Holland in 02. The fact is, sometimes good teams stuff up in qualifying and don't make it, and every team except Brazil has missed a WC at some stage. Europe is the strongest region in world football in terms of the strength of the middle of the pack teams, which is why they have the most spots by a long way, but part of the point of the World Cup is that it is a world competition. And as far as the gap widening is concerned, that's clearly not true. Look at the performance of Ghana and the Ivory Coast at this WC, where IC would have qualified from any other group, and Ghana not only beat the number two ranked side in the world, but played them off the park. If anything, it's been a constant theme of this WC that the gap between the top and bottom sides in world football isn't really that large. Note Ecuador beating Poland 2-0, Ghana beating the Czech's 2-0, Ukraine struggling against Tunisia, Ivory Coast beating S&M, and so on. The balance of 6/8 European sides left is significant, but it's the lower quality sides from a region that already gets a dozen spots that matter, not the ones that are capable of winning the tournament, and there's no evidence that Europe deserves more spots. And of course, at every WC there's a handful of European sides that make it and don't do anything, just like Tunisia etc at this one from Africa.

Togo are rubbish yes, and Angola aren't much good either, but the strength of African football is shown by the quality of the teams that didn't make it, as well as the performance of a couple of those that did. The weakest division in the world is North/Central America, which has four teams at this world cup, of which only Mexico performed notably. From Asia, only Australia made the second round, and they didn't qualify from Asia for this competition. Africa and South America on the other hand, like Europe, have genuinely high quality sides that are capable of competing with anyone in the world, and that should be the criteria for getting extra qualification spots. Currently North/Central America has 3.5 spots and Asia has 3.5 also, so I'd like to see that go down to 3 each, or maybe 3.5 for Asia and 2.5 for CONCACAF, if the competition stays at 32 spots. Given the goal of expanding the international nature of the competition and the quality that African sides have shown consistently since 1990, the extra spot should go to Africa.

Anyway, I think you underestimate the quality of some of the football sides from other parts of the world that missed out. Uruguay are certainly better than your dismissal of "not very good", and the likes of Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal, Columbia and so on are quite capable of competing with most middle of the road European sides too.

If anything, it's been a constant theme of this WC that the gap between the top and bottom sides in world football isn't really that large. Note Ecuador beating Poland 2-0, Ghana beating the Czech's 2-0, Ukraine struggling against Tunisia, Ivory Coast beating S&M, and so on.

Only one of those is a real shock. Poland aren't too crash hot. Ukraine are an average team with one good player, Tunisia are about the same, but without the good player. And Ivory Coast are a decent team, stronger than most teams in the tournament.

Anyway, I think you underestimate the quality of some of the football sides from other parts of the world that missed out. Uruguay are certainly better than your dismissal of "not very good", and the likes of Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal, Columbia and so on are quite capable of competing with most middle of the road European sides too.

Well living in Africa certainly gives me a fair opportunity to watch the continents football and Im sorry to say it is pretty poor.

Cameroon, Nigeria and Senegal may be capbable of competing with the middle of the road European sides as you say but the difference is that those European sides may only get the opportunity to compete in a World Cup once in a life time due to the system.

Africa does not deserve more teams as I said as they are not good enough and the top teams should go through given the system (though obviously this time strange things happened).

As for the rest of the world catching up to Europe it is the oppostite. Through the 90s they did but now it is getting stretched.

Teams from other regions have good players but do not have the depth that teams that come from countries with the recently developed uber-professional leagues.